<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Hi Michael,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>We can do some thought experiments around what option #2 would look like as for example, to deal with the issues of global/natonal security on the Internet but at the end of the day my guess is that it would look rather like a UN agency except one that had been updated from 19th century modes of operation (and assumptions about appropriate structures of governance) to ones more reflective of 21st century modes/assumptions and technology.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>How we get from here to there is of course, a challenge but if the major players are in fact operating in good faith with an overarching concern for the health and well being of the Internet infrastructure as a global public good rather than pursuing narrow national or commercial interests then developing a suitable set of mechanisms shouldn't be impossible.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>And you are right about "incumbents"--I was of course referring to dominant Internet players rather than telco incumbents…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Mike<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Michael Kende [mailto:Michael.Kende@analysysmason.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:20 PM<br><b>To:</b> governance@lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein; 'Lee W McKnight'<br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [governance] http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320121127<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Michael,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>What would #2 look like? Who would be responsible, what jurisdiction would they have, what hole would they fill? I think it is possible to prefer 1 over 3 even if you might prefer #2 to emerge, but there is no broadly articulated alternative, so what would you propose?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Michael<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><br>PS since a number of commercial incumbents are in fact behind one of the proposals to add Internet issues to the ITRs, I do not think your last statement is strictly accurate.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a> [<a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>michael gurstein<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 27, 2012 9:03 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; 'Lee W McKnight'<br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [governance] <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320121127">http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320121127</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I think it might be useful if the various discussants involved in the WCIT/ITU debate were to indicate which of these categories they would fall into:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> 1. no regulation of the Internet period<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> 2. possible regulation/global governance of the Internet in certain areas for certain issues but not by the ITU<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> 3. regulation of the Internet in certain identified issue areas by the ITU<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>It seems to me that a lot of the loudest voices in the discussion have come from those whose broad position is #1 but in a feat of legerdemaine they have managed to stampede many of those whose ultimate position would be #2 (based on a reasoned assessment of the broad needs of the global community) to support them by arguing that there were in fact only two options #1 and #3.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>That option #1 (i.e. the default option) would seem to strongly favour the current dominant geo-political and commercial incumbents is of course purely accidental.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>M<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> <a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a> [<a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Lee W McKnight<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 27, 2012 10:44 AM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> [governance] <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320121127">http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320121127</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>In case you missed it...today's Reuters article re WCIT.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br clear=all><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#999999'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#999999'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#999999'>This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business. <br><br>Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244. Email <a href="mailto:enquiries@analysysmason.com">enquiries@analysysmason.com</a> or visit <a href="http://www.analysysmason.com">www.analysysmason.com</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#999999'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center></span></div></div></body></html>